Breach of blockade

which grants them, not to press the letter of them too
rigorously. Thus a license to go to the ports of the
Vlie, Embden, Rotterdam, or elsewhere, was granted
by the British Government to an American vessel,
which on arriving at Falmouth had found that the
port of Amsterdam was under blockade. It was held
by Lord Stowell 58 that the license must be taken to
include Amsterdam, as being one of the ports of the
Vlie. So a license granted to import Spanish wool
from Holland, dated on the day of the date of the
Notification of the blockade of Holland, was inter-
preted to give the parties the full benefit of importing
such articles without molestation from the blockading
squadron 59.
If however the master of a neutral
vessel should have been involuntarily driven to enter
a blockaded port by stress of weather, or want of
provisions, or need of water, or by some other im-
perative and overruling necessity, such necessity
will excuse him from the charge of violating the
blockade, if his vessel should be captured. But it
will not be sufficient for him in such a case to show
that there were existing and adequate causes to ex-
plain the circumstance of his vessel seeking refuge
in the blockaded port; it must be established beyond
a doubt, that the vessel under the circumstances could
not have proceeded without hazard to any other port
than the blockaded port, in other words, that the
necessity was imperative.

§ 112. A vessel coming out of a blockaded port is by egress. prima facie liable to seizure, and if the cargo has

been taken on board since the commencement of the

58 The Juno, 2 Ch. Rob. p. 116.

p. 27.

61 The Hurtige Hane, 2 Ch. 59 The Hoffnung, 2 Ch. Rob. Rob. p. 127. The Arthur, Edwards, p. 263. The Charlotta, Ibid. p. 232.

p. 162.

6 The Fortuna, 6 Ch. Rob.

blockade, both ship and cargo will be liable to condemnation 62. "A blockade," says Lord Stowell, “is just as much violated by a vessel passing outwards as inwards. A blockade is a sort of circumvallation round a place, by which all foreign connection and correspondence is, as far as human force can effect it, to be entirely cut off. It is intended to suspend the entire commerce of the place, and a neutral is no more at liberty to assist the traffic of exportation than of importation. The utmost that can be allowed to a neutral vessel, is, that having already taken on board a cargo, before the blockade begins, she may be at liberty to retire with it. But it must be considered as a rule, which this Court means to apply, that a neutral ship, departing, can only take away a cargo bona fide purchased and delivered before the commencement of the blockade. If she afterwards takes on board a cargo, it is a fraudulent act and a violation of the blockade 63" The United States' Courts have held the same doctrine. Further, it is not necessary, that the whole of the cargo should be laden on board after the blockade has commenced, in order to render the departure of the vessel from the blockaded port an unlawful act. When any portion of the cargo has been taken on board after the existence of the blockade is known in the port, the act of egress is treated as a fraud against the right of the belligerent. This rule of the Prize Courts is founded on the principle that the interposition of a neutral in any way to assist in exporting goods from an enemy's port, after a blockade of that port has been established, tends directly to relieve the enemy

62 The Frederick Molke, 1 Ch. Rob. p. 86. 63 The Vrow Judith, 1 Ch. Rob. p. 152. The Comet, Ed

wards, p. 33.

64 Oliveira v. Union Insurance Company, 3 Wheaton, p. 183.

Egress lawful in certain

cases.

from the distress which the blockade was intended to create, and that the continuing to take in cargo after the time when the master of the neutral vessel was bound to take notice of the blockade, is inconsistent with good faith towards the blockading power65.

§ 113. It has been already observed that neutral vessels, which have entered an enemy's port before that port has been placed under blockade, may come out in ballast without violating the blockade, for their egress under those conditions cannot in any way prejudice the blockading power; and neutral vessels may also come out of a blockaded port without violating the blockade, if they have been compelled to enter it, after the blockade has been established, from stress of weather or other imperative necessity. Neutral vessels are also at liberty to come out without molestation if they have entered the port under the authority of a license from the Government of the blockading Power; for such license to enter the port implies a permission to come out of it. Again, a neutral vessel does not violate a blockade by reshipping and bringing out of a blockaded port goods which have been sent into the port before the blockade by a neutral merchant for sale, and which have been found unsalable, and are bond fide withdrawn by the owner. Again, a neutral vessel may take on board, and bring out after the commencement of a blockade a cargo, which has been purchased by a neutral merchant from the enemy during the blockade, if there be a well founded expectation of an immediate war between the country of the neutral merchant and that to which the blockaded port be

65 The Calypso, 2 Ch. Rob. p. 298.

66 The Juno, 2 Ch. Rob. p. 119.

67 The Charlotta, Edwards, p. 252.

68 The Juffrow Maria Schroeder, in notis, 4 Ch. Rob. p. 89.

longs, and consequently the danger of the seizure and confiscation of the property in port is imminent 69. Again, if a neutral ship arriving at the mouth of a blockaded port in ignorance of the blockade, is suffered to pass into the port, she may freely come out in ballast, for she has entered the port under an implied permission which fully protects her egress 70. Or if a vessel, of which the master has sailed with a knowledge of a blockade, is directly permitted by the blockading squadron to enter a blockaded port", or having been informed by a cruiser of the belligerent Power that the blockade has been raised, thereupon makes her way without molestation into the blockaded port, the vessel is entitled to free egress from the same port". In the case of the Rose in Bloom, Lord Stowell intimated, that if a vessel sailing out of a blockaded port of France under American colours had been employed by the American Consul resident in the port for the sole purpose of taking home distressed American seamen, who had been thrown out of employment and detained in the ports of France by the violence of the ruling Power there, she would have been entitled to a very favourable consideration from the blockading Power, whose Courts of Prize, from motives of humanity, might reasonably allow such a case to be an exception to the general rule.

of delictum

§ 114. If a neutral vessel has violated a blockade Duration by egress, she is regarded as still in delicto until she after has reached her port of destination, and completed egress.

69 The Drie Vrienden, 1 Dod- Vrow Barbara, ibid. in notis, p.

son, p. 269.

70 The Christina Margaretta,

6 Ch. Rob. p. 63.

71 The Juffrow Maria Schroeder, 3 Ch. Rob. p. 149.

The

158

72 The Neptunus, 2 Ch. Rob. p. 110.

73 The Rose in Bloom, r Dobson, p. 58.

her voyage. Thus we find it directed by the third article of the Ordinance of the States General of 26 June 1630, above referred to, that "vessels returning from the ports of Flanders, with the exception of such as have been driven into them by an extreme necessity, although they should be met with at a great distance from those ports by vessels of the State without having been previously pursued by any of the blockading fleet, shall be confiscated, because such vessels are held to have been taken in the fact as long as they have not completed their voyage, and have not arrived in some port which is free, or belonging to a neutral Prince. Such vessels indeed with their cargoes shall not be liable to be confiscated if they shall have arrived in any such port as specified, unless they have been pursued in coming out of the ports of Flanders by some vessel of war, and have taken refuge in such port, not being their own port, nor the port of their destination, and shall have ventured out to sea again, and been captured on the high seas." Bynkershoek 75, in commenting on this Ordinance of the States General observes, that the exception in favour of a vessel which has arrived at her own port, if it is intended to distinguish such a port from her port of destination, is not reasonable. "A British vessel," he says, "which has come out of a blockaded port of Flanders, destined to a Danish port, and having taken refuge from the pursuit of the blockading squadron in a British port, afterwards ventures out to sea and pursues her original destination to a Danish port, appears to be still in itinere et ipso actu." He is therefore disposed to construe the Dutch Ordinance, as granting the exemption to ves

74 The Weelvaart Van Pillaw, 75 Quæstiones Jur. Publ. L. I. 2 Ch. Rob. p. 128. The General Hamilton, 6 Ch. Rob. p. 61.

C. II.